- The contractual relationship between parties and their adjudicator (Linnett v Harding)
- Original news
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was this case about?
- What did the judge decide?
- Case details
Construction analysis: In the latest Technology and Construction Court (TCC) decision to come out of the Harding v Paice saga, Alexander Nissen QC sitting as a deputy analyses the contractual position of a party who participates in an adjudication under a reservation of rights, and declines to accept the adjudicator’s offered terms. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the court found that William Harding Ltd in this case had concluded a contract with the adjudicator by conduct, and that the terms of that contract were the adjudicator’s standard terms, those being the only terms on offer.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial